So I see a lot of people talking about "how many interviews you need to feel confident." That's an okay measure, but there are a lot of people that get ~4 interviews, and zero acceptances. I think a better measure would be interview percentage. Ie, I would feel more confident as a person that applied to 8 schools and got 3 interviews than I would as a person who applied to 25 and got 4. This could be a simple measure, such as # interviews/ # secondaries, or it could be a more complicated weighted system which includes the selectivity of the schools you're applying to. I'd love to hear ideas for a weighted formula.
There are a few problems with such a blunt metric. Here are a few variables that will impact the ability to accurately assign a likelihood of matriculation.
School selection ,you can have two identical candidates that apply to the same schools and receive II's from them,but applicant B applies to 10 additional schools that are reaches because applicant B is a firm believer in the ancient philosophy of YOLO. The strength of applications is identical yet you will artificially decrease confidence in matriculation for applicant B.
2 variable : Time of interview offered. August vs. March. Either indicates preference or time of completion. Look at UMich's pdf where chances of acceptance decrease by 33%.
3rd : Interview performance: This may vary based on an almost infinite number of factors- applicant wore the wrong tie, interviewer was in a terrible mood, social mishaps, personality mismatch, a case of jet lag, unusual question,lack of preparation,verbal diarrhea, etc etc. If you think of it as a naturally occurring process you will be close to the median in performance but may still encounter natural variation in performance a few SD's above or below your baseline ultimately rising in median with more practice. I personally think if an applicant has 3+ interviews the later interviews will be of better quality due to practice. This is ultimately the biggest wildcard and has some of the most uncontrollable variables.
4th variable: Post interview acceptance rates vary drastically from school to school. Some of thus data is not publically available from a reliable source. You would have to agree on the data and then ask everyone to use it in calculations. These rates also vary for IS vsOOS for schools that display any preference.
5TH Variable: Waitlist movement, you maybe waitlisted but other acceptees may withdraw in a process that can only be described as random.
6th variable: Internal rubric and processes probably look very different for different schools. With one assigning higher preference to a certain variable compared to the other. The internal process for selection may differ in other unpredictable ways.Are all applicants equal post II and is the decision based on interview performance or is it more varied incorporating gpa mcat,lor,and ecs even after IIs.
All I do know is that uncertainty in matriculation decrease to zero as the cycle is moving to completion and is at zero at matriculation
TLDR: Too much stuff going on.
